158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17926957)
1. IMRT optimization including random and systematic geometric errors based on the expectation of TCP and NTCP.
Witte MG; van der Geer J; Schneider C; Lebesque JV; Alber M; van Herk M
Med Phys; 2007 Sep; 34(9):3544-55. PubMed ID: 17926957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Inverse and forward optimization of one- and two-dimensional intensity-modulated radiation therapy-based treatment of concave-shaped planning target volumes: the case of prostate cancer.
Corletto D; Iori M; Paiusco M; Brait L; Broggi S; Ceresoli G; Iotti C; Calandrino R; Fiorino C
Radiother Oncol; 2003 Feb; 66(2):185-95. PubMed ID: 12648791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparisons of treatment optimization directly incorporating random patient setup uncertainty with a margin-based approach.
Moore JA; Gordon JJ; Anscher MS; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2009 Sep; 36(9):3880-90. PubMed ID: 19810460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Probabilistic objective functions for margin-less IMRT planning.
Bohoslavsky R; Witte MG; Janssen TM; van Herk M
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Jun; 58(11):3563-80. PubMed ID: 23640114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The use of spatial dose gradients and probability density function to evaluate the effect of internal organ motion for prostate IMRT treatment planning.
Jiang R; Barnett RB; Chow JC; Chen JZ
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Mar; 52(5):1469-84. PubMed ID: 17301465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Radiobiological impact of reduced margins and treatment technique for prostate cancer in terms of tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP).
Jensen I; Carl J; Lund B; Larsen EH; Nielsen J
Med Dosim; 2011; 36(2):130-7. PubMed ID: 20488692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Coverage optimized planning: probabilistic treatment planning based on dose coverage histogram criteria.
Gordon JJ; Sayah N; Weiss E; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):550-63. PubMed ID: 20229863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Under conditions of large geometric miss, tumor control probability can be higher for static gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy compared to volume-modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer.
Balderson M; Brown D; Johnson P; Kirkby C
Med Dosim; 2016; 41(2):180-5. PubMed ID: 27067229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. IMRT: improvement in treatment planning efficiency using NTCP calculation independent of the dose-volume-histogram.
Grigorov GN; Chow JC; Grigorov L; Jiang R; Barnett RB
Med Phys; 2006 May; 33(5):1250-8. PubMed ID: 16752559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The comparison of radiotherapy techniques for treatment of the prostate cancer: the three-field vs. the four-field.
Milecki P; Piotrowski T; Dymnicka M
Neoplasma; 2004; 51(1):64-9. PubMed ID: 15004663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Dosimetry and radiobiologic model comparison of IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy in treatment of carcinoma of the prostate.
Luxton G; Hancock SL; Boyer AL
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2004 May; 59(1):267-84. PubMed ID: 15093924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The required number of treatment imaging days for an effective off-line correction of systematic errors in conformal radiotherapy of prostate cancer--a radiobiological analysis.
Amer AM; Mackay RI; Roberts SA; Hendry JH; Williams PC
Radiother Oncol; 2001 Nov; 61(2):143-50. PubMed ID: 11690679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinical adequacy assessment of autocontours for prostate IMRT with meaningful endpoints.
Nourzadeh H; Watkins WT; Ahmed M; Hui C; Schlesinger D; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2017 Apr; 44(4):1525-1537. PubMed ID: 28196288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Potential improvements in the therapeutic ratio of prostate cancer irradiation: dose escalation of pathologically identified tumour nodules using intensity modulated radiotherapy.
Nutting CM; Corbishley CM; Sanchez-Nieto B; Cosgrove VP; Webb S; Dearnaley DP
Br J Radiol; 2002 Feb; 75(890):151-61. PubMed ID: 11893639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Coverage-based treatment planning to accommodate delineation uncertainties in prostate cancer treatment.
Xu H; Gordon JJ; Siebers JV
Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 42(9):5435-43. PubMed ID: 26328992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of patient setup errors on simultaneously integrated boost head and neck IMRT treatment plans.
Siebers JV; Keall PJ; Wu Q; Williamson JF; Schmidt-Ullrich RK
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Oct; 63(2):422-33. PubMed ID: 16168835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of the dosimetric impact of non-exclusion of the rectum from the boost PTV in IMRT treatment plans for prostate cancer patients.
Kassim I; Dirkx ML; Heijmen BJ
Radiother Oncol; 2009 Jul; 92(1):62-7. PubMed ID: 19278745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Normal tissue complication probability: does simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiotherapy score over other techniques in treatment of prostate adenocarcinoma.
Basu KS; Bahl A; Subramani V; Sharma DN; Rath GK; Julka PK
J Cancer Res Ther; 2009; 5(2):78-84. PubMed ID: 19542662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Computerized design of target margins for treatment uncertainties in conformal radiotherapy.
Mageras GS; Fuks Z; Leibel SA; Ling CC; Zelefsky MJ; Kooy HM; van Herk M; Kutcher GJ
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1999 Jan; 43(2):437-45. PubMed ID: 10030273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Radiobiological impact of dose calculation algorithms on biologically optimized IMRT lung stereotactic body radiation therapy plans.
Liang X; Penagaricano J; Zheng D; Morrill S; Zhang X; Corry P; Griffin RJ; Han EY; Hardee M; Ratanatharathom V
Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jan; 11():10. PubMed ID: 26800883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
